Talk:Seven Ninja Swordsmen of the Mist
Debut Any particular reason for that chapter/episode as the debut? I believe the debut should be either when they were first mentioned, which would place the debut around Zabuza's introduction in the beginning of the series, or when they first appeared as a team, which would make it a post-mortem debut, as resurrected shinobi. Opinions? Omnibender - Talk - 02:14, February 19, 2012 (UTC) :Given that the term itself applies to multiple generations, rather than just those who appeared post-mortem, I think the first mention is the more appropriate of the two options that are suggested, which I believe is also consistent with what is done with other such groups. Blackstar1 (talk) 02:40, February 19, 2012 (UTC) Since most members are "former" (deceased or defected), I'd say Zabuza's debut would mark the group's. Yatanogarasu (Talk) 04:37, February 19, 2012 (UTC) Though I'd prefer it if it were when we say the group during the fourth war, there are multiple generations so it seems better to go with when the group was mentioned in this instance.--Cerez365™ 10:25, February 19, 2012 (UTC) :Ok then, I go for the group's first mention. I'm not finding any reference to the group when Zabuza first appears, at least in the manga. What episode was that image that only had silhouettes from? Do we still have that? Omnibender - Talk - 16:05, February 19, 2012 (UTC) ::Uhm, I checked the page history and it doesn't seem so. You might want to revive (File:Seven swordsmen.jpg) to see if it has the rationale information. I can't remember where the silhouette's from either.--Cerez365™ 16:16, February 19, 2012 (UTC) :::Just checked the history, the rationale never listed the episode. Omnibender - Talk - 16:41, February 19, 2012 (UTC) Differentiating Generations i personally think the members should be divided by what generation of the seven swordsman they belonged to, previous or current/recent i.e. Zabuza's Generation should be listed together (the seven revived ones), While their successors should be marked, i.e. Chojuro, Kisame, and Raiga, seperately. I was thinking dividing it in a similar fashion to how the edo tensei is divided amongst who summoned them. these are my thoughts, do with them what ye will Shadowfox337 (talk) 00:22, March 25, 2012 (UTC) Second coming of the demon What does it stands for ? I always thought that it refer to Zabuza "the demon" but Zabuza was just a member of the group and Mangetsu leader, so why is the latter called second coming of the demon ? Maybe I have missed something--Elveonora (talk) 12:55, May 31, 2012 (UTC) Bump, any idea ?--Elveonora (talk) 20:12, May 31, 2012 (UTC) I think it was because Mangetsu and Suigetsu were adept at killing like Zabuza. Joshbl56 20:22, May 31, 2012 (UTC) Possible ... just wonder what the term does refer to--Elveonora (talk) 20:28, May 31, 2012 (UTC) missing members? Since I don't read the manga I wouldn't know if it says something about it but, wasn't Jinpachi Munashi and Jinin Akebino mebers before their death? --Kasan94 (talk) 15:22, May 31, 2012 (UTC) :: This is not really something regarding my first question, but thought i might write it here anyway. How come, I can't change the infobox on this page, but other pages I can?--Kasan94 (talk) 19:17, May 31, 2012 (UTC) Yes they were. You can't be a member and dead. Why do you ask? As for your second question, the infobox or page may be locked to editing.--Cerez365™ (talk) 19:19, May 31, 2012 (UTC) ::For the first question. It was because earlier today their names wasn't showing, and nether the gender of one of the others, maybe just a bug from my computer, since they are there now. Second question. Ahh okay I have seen now that it is with most groups, but not with the persons.--Kasan94 (talk) 19:24, May 31, 2012 (UTC) Now, Kushimaru isnt listed among the members, and Mangetsu with Raiga dont have their genders said there. Take a look on it please --VolteMetalic (talk) 20:02, September 6, 2012 (UTC) We're experiencing issues with the infoboxes...--Cerez365™ (talk) 11:45, September 7, 2012 (UTC) Missing Mangetsu Hōzuki is missing from the info box. Zelwolf (talk) 20:06, October 18, 2012 (UTC)Zelwolf :Refer to warning in the main page of the wiki. Omnibender - Talk - 20:42, October 18, 2012 (UTC) Original Swords? When they say hiramekarei is the only one that kirigakure has that is the original out of the seven swords, does that mean that the swords we saw during Edo Tensei weren't the original swords, or just that Kirigakure didn't have any except the hiramekarei? What I mean is, were the original swords the samehada, nuibari, etc, or were the original swords lost and replaced with those?-- (talk) 05:09, April 15, 2013 (UTC) It means what it says, the former, Kiri has only that glasses dude's fish chakra hammer sword. EDIT: not to mention the fact that the swords were stated to have been passed down from generation to generation should alone have answered your question and this is a more appropriate place to ask in the future, here--Elveonora (talk) 12:28, April 15, 2013 (UTC) Trivia Who is this: "Two members of the Seven Swordsmen (three in the anime) managed to fake their own deaths or regain life later on, by the means of an accomplice." Pointed towards, and why? --Kasan94 (talk) 17:54, September 25, 2013 (UTC) :Zabuza faked his death with Haku's help, Kisame faked his death with Zetsu and Raiga regained his life thanks to Ranmaru. Jacce | Talk | 17:58, September 25, 2013 (UTC) :: Ohh now I remember, I thought it was something further back in history :P my bad, thanks! --Kasan94 (talk) 18:03, September 25, 2013 (UTC) Sauce "The members of the Seven Ninja Swordsmen were the people who came from the Bloody Mist's graduation exams with the greatest battle skills." - Can I have sauce on that, please? Seelentau 愛議 14:56, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :I can only assume a databook somewhere but by the Light I can't begin to tell you for sure.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 15:04, March 12, 2014 (UTC) I believe it was either Kakashi, Kisame, or Zabuza who said it. Likely Kisame.--'NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 15:07, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :Could you find me a source? :/ Seelentau 愛議 15:19, March 12, 2014 (UTC) ::Yea, ill try n' find you one --'''NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 15:23, March 12, 2014 (UTC) Alright sempai. I've found that source for you. It's chapter 14, pages 5-6. Kakashi said it to Zabuza in their first encounter. I also added the citation to the page as well. --'''NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 15:44, March 12, 2014 (UTC) EDIT: By the way, are you going to try and get your own translation of the info?--'''NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 15:46, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :I would, but what I'm looking for isn't said there. :/ Seelentau 愛議 15:47, March 12, 2014 (UTC) That wasn't the right source?--'''NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 15:51, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :No, it doesn't say anything about the swordsmen. :/ Seelentau 愛議 16:48, March 12, 2014 (UTC) ::There must be an error in interpretation here. This was the only source in the series that said the ''Bloody Mist held exams that had the students slaughter each other. The page says that "The members of the Seven Ninja Swordsmen were the people who came from the Bloody Mist's graduation exams with the greatest battle skills". This could have been a misinterpretation by us who assumed that since Zabuza did it, all the Ninja Swordsmen did. That would mean our wording could be wrong, but the source was the closest thing to what you were referring to.--'NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 16:58, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :::Thought so. Thank you, anyway. ^_^ Seelentau 愛議 17:05, March 12, 2014 (UTC) ::::Glad I could help ^_~--'''NaviiGator' ('''A.K.A.'KotoSenju)Talk Page- 17:07, March 12, 2014 (UTC) Generations From what that one swordsman said about how famous they are, I conclude that there's only been two generations of swordsmen and they indeed formed from the Chigiri's bloody exam. What do you guys think? Seelentau 愛議 15:19, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :I'm just gonna say yeah and roll with it. What's the worst that could happen.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 15:21, March 12, 2014 (UTC) ::Suigetsu is planning to create his own generation of the swordsmen, so it'll become the next generation. Zabuza's group is the latest and the group which introduced today is the former/previous generation. So, it's two or three if we include Suigetsu's group. —[[User:Shakhmoot|'Shakhmoot''']] (Talk) 15:23, March 12, 2014 (UTC) Members Previous Shibuki Wielder didn't make it into the former members list with the other previous members, and i don't know how/have the permissions to edit that section. Shadowfox337 (talk) 17:30, March 12, 2014 (UTC) How to deal with Raiga's inclusion in the manga? Since the release of the last chapter, I've been watching the edits on this page, Raiga's page, etc... Something is bothering me with those edits. Raiga's a character we all know from the anime, but this was his very first appearance in the manga. Considering that manga info comes first and foremost, I think a few things should be considered: 1 - Ameyuri was stated as being part of the last generation of Mist Swordsman. Raiga was seen in this chapter along with members of a previous generation, so it's pretty sure he was part of that generation that came before Ameyuri. 2 - Some pages state that Raiga succeeded Ameyuri in the Swordsmen as Kiba's wielder... that may be true according to the anime, where they have shown Raiga wielding Kiba during Part I. Again, in the anime. 3 - We had a similar case with Gari and Pakura, where it was decided that the characters in the manga were different from the characters in the 3rd Shippuden movie. They only had the same design. 4 - If this is indeed Raiga and not a "new character with the same design as one that appeared in other piece of media", the only things we know about him from the manga are: A - He wields Kiba; B - His generation of Swordsmen came before the one with Zabuza, Ameyuri, Jinpachi and Mangetsu. Everything that we know from the Anime's Raiga should be taken with a grain of salt, even though it happened long before the manga appearance. This to say that in my mind information like "Raiga succeeded Ameyuri" and "Raiga's inclusion in the manga creates a discrepancy" are not to be said. Manga is more important than anime, so the displayed info should be like "In the anime, Raiga succeeded Ameyuri and that creates a discrepancy". Having said all of that (sorry about the long text), I think the higher-ups here in Naruto Wiki should decide how to deal with information regarding Raiga. Kyoraku08 (talk) 18:25, March 12, 2014 (UTC) It should be written as it happens, kishi did this on purpose i think. Munchvtec (talk) 18:30, March 12, 2014 (UTC) :I think were wrong right off the bat in assuming that is Raiga simply because he looks like him. I preent to the court: Chūkichi, Pakura and Gari. Along with the fact that Raiga's teeth weren't sharpened in the anime nor is he named after produce. Rethinking it, I don't think we should be so quick to write him into canon.--Cerez365™ (talk) 18:39, March 12, 2014 (UTC) lets wait till next chapter then, maybe they'll show the fight and we'll learn more. I say leave the info till then. Munchvtec (talk) 18:41, March 12, 2014 (UTC)